South Yorkshire Bus Service Needs Improvement

[RollingJ 1,999]

I agree it should be done at a national level, by individuals who know what they are doing, but as you point out 'local' politicians won't approve it, nor will they look at areas where it already works, because in those areas, the local authorities work in co-operation with both the bus companies and other surrounding LA's - never gonna happen up here, because the brain-power doesn't exist.

[Resident 1,185]

The main issue with returning the buses back to the council is that it won't be the council running it. It will be a PFI company, no doubt one willing to fill brown envelopes. It will still be a private company, one still looking for profit however creaming more from taxpayers when the books don't balance. 

 

As for someone earlier in the thread (@andyc ?). I believe in the year prior to covid both Stagecoach Yorkshire and First South Yorkshire report large losses

[RollingJ 1,999]

Get rid of the 'PTEs' and allow sensible co-operation - as I've pointed out on more than one occasion, this does work.

[BigAl1 143]

I have to agree that the politicians are at the route of the problem but that the PTE should if it was functioning properly and staffed by transport experts be part of the solution and not part of the problem

 

Sensible co operation I love it when you look at how Stagecoach bus and Stagecoach trams can not even co operate at Middlewood to provide a seamless service between bus and tram in normal times then What hope for wider cooperation with First , Northern,TPE and others?

 

Could not help but notice yesterday several of the Tramlink buses I saw were empty - now I know it was Easter and that there is a pandemic but I can not but help wonder if there might have been more passengers (and therefore revenue) had the bus continued at the very least to Hillsborough where there were onward connections

[RollingJ 1,999]

@Bigal1 The sensible co-operation I was referring to works very well - in the area I was referring to, which is East/West Sussex, Surrey (part) and Hampshire (part), where the Go-Ahead Group are possibly the largest operator, but they are staffed and run by people who respond to 'real-world' changes/suggestions and are prepared to help the smaller operators in the area - and there are quite a number of those down there.

 

Unfortunately, Stagecoach are also a big presence in the area, and don't co-operate, so if you are unfortunate enough to have to use their services, you need to buy another ticket, but so far (in 15 years of being down there for up to 3 months of the year), I've managed to avoid  having to use them. Not a problem from now on though as I qualify for an ENCTS OAP pass.

 

Stagecoach are a law unto themselves, wherever they operate, and seem to be unable to even co-ordinate their own operations, so they are the stumbling blocks, along with the politicians, in this area. The PTE will never function properly, as those same politicians (poly=many Tics=aggravating insects) use it to their own ends, and do not allow the right people in to run it.

[Annie Bynnol 612]

28 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

Get rid of the 'PTEs' and allow sensible co-operation - as I've pointed out on more than one occasion, this does work.

The nice people at the 'PTE' are going to get me a bus pass.

Who will get me a bus pass and distribute the Government money to the bus, tram and rail companies if you get rid of the 'PTE'.

If  you get rid of the 'PTE', who will arrange the subsid

 

ies for rural, weekend and early/late bus routes.

 

Stagecoach are infamous throughout their history for their cooperation with Governments, DfT, DfE, 'PTEs', Local Government, other bus companies and anybody that crosses their path. Using the privatisation rules set by the Government Stagecoach have been ruthless is removing competition.

In many ways cooperation between bus companies is illegal.

 

We should be very thankful for the level of competition that Stagecoach (have yet  failed to eliminate) have in this area. 

 

 

 

[RollingJ 1,999]

2 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

The nice people at the 'PTE' are going to get me a bus pass.

Who will get me a bus pass and distribute the Government money to the bus, tram and rail companies if you get rid of the 'PTE'.

If  you get rid of the 'PTE', who will arrange the subsid

 

ies for rural, weekend and early/late bus routes.

 

Stagecoach are infamous throughout their history for their cooperation with Governments, DfT, DfE, 'PTEs', Local Government, other bus companies and anybody that crosses their path. Using the privatisation rules set by the Government Stagecoach have been ruthless is removing competition.

In many ways cooperation between bus companies is illegal.

 

We should be very thankful for the level of competition that Stagecoach (have yet  failed to eliminate) have in this area. 

 

 

 

In answer to your first question, I assume that responsibility falls to your local council should the PTE not exist - I know people who have various ENTCS passes who do not live in areas covered by PTE's, so someone obviously administers them - I also know these same organisations administer the BSOG.

 

The rest of your post is unintelligible.

[Guest busdriver1]

2 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

The nice people at the 'PTE' are going to get me a bus pass.

Who will get me a bus pass and distribute the Government money to the bus, tram and rail companies if you get rid of the 'PTE'.

If  you get rid of the 'PTE', who will arrange the subsid

 

ies for rural, weekend and early/late bus routes.

 

Stagecoach are infamous throughout their history for their cooperation with Governments, DfT, DfE, 'PTEs', Local Government, other bus companies and anybody that crosses their path. Using the privatisation rules set by the Government Stagecoach have been ruthless is removing competition.

In many ways cooperation between bus companies is illegal.

 

We should be very thankful for the level of competition that Stagecoach (have yet  failed to eliminate) have in this area. 

 

 

 

Local councils do it very well without the need to grandstand their existence. 

As for stagecoaches operations, a lot could be said but won't as the libel laws prevent me. ( p.s. libel does not mean untrue, it means damaging and boy they can be damaged). 

As for providing low usage services, again local councils do a better job in many areas than the pte do round here.  However, I maintain a national body should be doing it not a local one. 

Edited April 6, 2021 by busdriver1

[Annie Bynnol 612]

13 hours ago, busdriver1 said:

Local councils do it very well without the need to grandstand their existence. 

As for stagecoaches operations, a lot could be said but won't as the libel laws prevent me. ( p.s. libel does not mean untrue, it means damaging and boy they can be damaged). 

As for providing low usage services, again local councils do a better job in many areas than the pte do round here.  However, I maintain a national body should be doing it not a local one. 

Most Councils who go it alone are rural or semi-rural and through no fault of their own have seen a serious decline in provision and usage. 

Most Councils do not act alone, some cannot, some have opted into agreements with nearby authorities, some have retained arrangements which applied before a reorganisation and some have had to in order to access some form of Government funding.

A large percentage(most?) public transport users travel across Council boundaries in the large conurbations. Fragmenting public transport decisions would be very much a backward step in organizing integration.

We already know that a  national system would channel funding into the South East.

 

Perhaps the "PTEs" are outdated, guilty of their 'white elephants', inappropriate, weak etc, but it's what we have but  nobody has come up with an alternative which balances need, economics, private enterprize, politics, regional and local needs etc.

With Governments dithering on regional public transport, the end of EU subsidy and soon reacting to Covid, nobody has a plan focused on the needs of users. 

Better the devil you know...

Most of  the more successful European systems would be totally illegal in the England. 

 

Edited April 7, 2021 by Annie Bynnol

[RollingJ 1,999]

@Annie BynnolWe are talking here about the ENCTS - which is administered nationally, the only 'local' element is who you apply to. In this area, it is the PTE, in areas where PTEs don't exist, it is usually your local council, although all requests eventually end up going to a central point (in the Portsmouth area), for pass production, and at a guess are then recorded on a government database (DfT?).

 

As regards cross-city/county agreements in the area I keep mentioning, they are due to the operators and councils realising that an integrated ticketing system works best if it covers a wide as possible area and number of operators, and is administered by people who are capable (i.e. NOT politicians).

[BigAl1 143]

Don't get hung up on there being a PTE or not. Standard government operating procedure is when one idea fails they will reinvent it with a new name.

 

What matters is the leadership of said organisation and the degree of political interference

[RollingJ 1,999]

I'm not 'hung up' on PTE/non-PTE , although their existence is quite often a barrier to efficiency as they have been grabbed by individuals with no experience of public transport organisation/provision, for political ends.

 

I'll say it again (and again) - this subject requires those at the sharp end to know how to do the job required, and if they are allowed to do it - in co-operation with local authorities and interested operators - it works very well.

 

How many PTE's are headed by people from the transport world?

Edited April 7, 2021 by RollingJ